ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
STAMINA OF A GASKETED BOLTED FLANGED
PIPE JOINT UNDER DYNAMIC LOADING
‘Mama Apip!, ATTA UR REHMAN SHAH” aND HaFiz ABDUL Wasi"
“Interdisciplinary Research Center, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology,
Wah Cantt, Pakistan
2Department of Mechanical Engineering, HITEC University, Tavila, Pakistan.
"Department of Mathematics, COMSATS Institure of Information Tecimology
Lahore, Pakistan
“Department of Electrical Engineering, Islamic University Medina, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
“corresponding author: atta8S@engineer.com
(Received! 1 Jun 2015; Accepted! 25% Mar. 2016; Published on-line: 30 Nov. 2016)
ABSTRACT: Gasketed bolted flange joints are the most critical components in pipelines
for their sealing and strength under operating conditions. Most of the work available in
literature is under static loading, whereas in industry, cyclic loads are applied due to the
vibrating machinery such as motors, pumps, sloshing in offshore applications and in the
ships ete. In this study a three dimensional finite element analysis of a gasketed joint is
cartied out using a spiral wound gasket under bolt up and dynamic operating conditions
(internal pressure, axial and bending) singly and in combination. The cyclic axial loads
are concluded relatively more challenging for both the sealing and strength of the joint.
Higher magnitudes of loads and frequencies are also observed more challenging to the
Joints performance.
ABSTRAK: Send bebibir yang bergasket dan bolt adalah komponen paling kriikal
dalam saluran paip bagi pengedapan dan kelwuatan mereka di dalam keadsan operas
Kebanyakan kajian yang sedia ada dalam sastera adalah di bawah pembebanan stati,
sedangkan dalam industri, beban kitar digunakan untuk jentera bergetar seperti motor,
pam, sloshing dalam aplikasi luar pesisir dan dalam kapal dan lain-lain. Dalam Kajian ini
analisis elemen finite tiga dimensi bagi sendi bergasket dijalankan menggunakan gasket
bergelendong spiral dalam Keadaan operasi yang dinamik (tekanan dalaman, bersama
paksi dan lentur) secara tunggal dan dalam kombinasi. Beban paksi kitaran diselesaikan
dalam keadaan lebih mencabar bagi pengedapan dan kekuatan sendi, Magnitad yang
tinggi dari beban dan frelmensi juga didapati lebih mencabar kepada prestasi sendi
KEYWORDS: grid-connected PV system; power electronic interface; modeling: control
1. INTRODUCTION
Gasketed pipe flange joints are widely used to connect pipe-to-pipe or pipe-to-other-
equipment in industries including muclear, petrochemical, processing, pressure vessels, and
piping industries etc. These joints are considered to be the weakest elements (in terms of
sealing and strength) in many industrial applications. Most of the previous work is limited
to bolt up, internal pressure, and static external loading only, but the actual conditions of
the industry are dynamic in nature. These dynamic loads may be applied by various
vibrating machinery like pumps, motors, and gear machinery. Vibrations may also be due
to sloshing effects and offshore applications. These dynamic conditions are the actual risk
to the strength and sealing capability of the pipe joints. A limited amount of work isITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
available in literature [1-10] focusing on the dynamic behavior of gasketed bolted pipe
joints but no research has yet been observed to address these issues. In a gasketed pipe
flange joint, problems of strength, bolt scatter, bolt bending, and joint relaxation are
observed even during bolt-up; resulting in the flange rotation and gasket crushing. Under
applied operating conditions. the performance worsens under bolt-up plus harmonic axial
loading.
In the present study, a three dimensional finite element analysis of a gasketed pipe
flange joint is carried out using a Spiral Wound Gasket (SWG) under bolt-up, internal
pressure, and harmonically applied external loads (Axial and Bending); these are given in
Table 1. Variable loading magnitudes applied are selected based on the steady state
analysis given in reference [11]. Frequencies of loads applied are chosen on the basis of
available pumps [12]. A Flange joint of four-inch 900+ class is used in the present study.
Table 1: Loading conditions
Se # Load ‘Type of loading Load
1 Boleup ASME bolt up strategy Torque=700 Nin
2 Harmonic Harmonie axial loading only
loadings FRQ-30~60 Hz
Harmonie bending loading only BL=10-25 kNm
FRQ=30~60 Hz
Design pressure ps harmonic axial
loadings
FRQ=30-60 Hz
Design pressure plus harmonic bending DP=15.3 MPa,
loadings BL=10-25 Nm
FRQ-20~60 Hz
Design pressure pls combined harmonic DP-15.3 MPa,
axial plus bending loadings AL=525 kN
2. FINITE ELEMENT MODELING, MESHING
2.4 Modeling and Meshing
A complete 360-degree model of the flange joint, developed by [11], is modified and
used as shown in Fig. 1. Due to the symmetry of the geometry and loading conditions, half
the thickness of the gasket is modeled. A pipe of 330 mm length is modeled with the
flange. Keeping in view the symmetry of the joint, only one side of the joint is used
Commercial FEA software ANSYS [13] is used during the analysis.
A SOLID4S structural element is used to model the flange, bolt, gasket and pipe:
three-dimensional ‘surface-to-surface’ CONTAI74 contact elements, in combination with
TARGE170 target elements are used between the flange face and gasket, bolt shank and
flange hole, the top of the flange, and the bottom of the bolt in order to simulate contact,
distribution for both structural and thermal models. A 3-D interface element INTER195 is
used as a special gasket element for meshing of the spiral wound gasket, which is
compatible with SOLID4S structural elements. The gasket meshing requires two faces i
138ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
source and target faces. The source face which is the top area of the gasket is meshed with
SHELL 63 elements. The FE model used is already validated by [11] under static internal
pressure loading.
FO
Fig. 1: Modeling and meshing of flange, bolt and gasket.
2.2. Material Properties
Allowable stresses and material properties for the flange, pipe, and bolt are given in
Table 2 [14], Bilinear elastoplastic material is used for the flange and bolts. Non-linear
material behavior of the spiral wound gasket is defined using a simplified approach [15].
Table 2: Material properties
Young's modulus Poisson's Allowable stress
Paves Aspercode (ray ratio (ra)
Flange/pipe ASTM A350 LF2 173058, 03 248.223)
Bolt __ASTMSA193B7 168922 03 739
3. BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
Bolt-up: Bolts ate constrained in the radial and tangential directions and are free to
elongate in the axial direction. During bolt tightening, displacement is applied at the
bottom of the bolts to achieve target stress. ASME bolt-up strategy is used to tighten the
bolts [16]. The variable loading magnitudes applied are selected based on the steady state
analysis given in reference [11]
Contact Initiation: The contact is initiated between the flange face and the bottom of
the bolt and between the flange raised face bottom and the gasket top surface by applying a
sufficiently small displacement at the bottom of the bolts (UY=-0.01 mm) such that it must
not produce stress in the joint components
Pre-stress or bolt-up: Target stress in the bolts is achieved by applying a second value
of displacement in sequence at the bottom of the bolts.
139ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
Harmonic axial loading: After bolt-up, extemal axial loads (100~650 kN) with different
cyclic frequencies (30-60 Hz ie. 1800-3600 RPM) are applied to analyze the joint
behavior.
Internal pressure plus harmonic axial loading: After bolt-up, static design pressure is
applied and then harmonic axial loads (100~650 kN) with different cyclic frequencies
(30-60 Hz) are applied
Harmonic bending foading: After bolt-up, harmonic bending loads (10-25 kNm) with
different cyclic frequencies (30~60 Hz) are applied to analyze the joint behavior.
Internal pressure plus harmonic bending loading: After bolt-up, static design pressure is
applied and then harmonic bending loads (10-25 kNm) with different cyclic frequencies
(30-60 Hz) are applied
Internal pressure plus combination of harmonic axial loading plus harmonic bending
Joading: After bolt-up, static design pressure is applied and then combined harmonic axial
loading (525 kN) plus harmonic bending loads (10-20 kNm) with different eyclic
frequencies (30~60 Hz) are applied.
Applied boundary conditions are shown in Fig. 2(a)
(a)
(b)
Fig. 2: (a) Boundary conditions (b) Flange quarter model showing different locations of
stress measurement.
140ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Results are taken at different locations in the joint including the pipe, hub center, hub-
flange fillet, bolts and gasket. Some of the locations are tagged in Fig. 2(b).
4.1 Pipe and Hub Center
Stress variation at the pipe and hub center is observed within the yield limit of the
pipe and flange material at all locations under all loadings and frequencies.
4.2. Hub Flange Fillet
The hub flange fillet is a critical location since principal stress and stress intensity
values have exceeded the yield stress limit of the flange material even at bolt-up.
4.2.1 Harmonic axial loading only
Figure 3 shows stress results at the hub flange fillet location under harmonic axial
loading. Awial stress las crossed the yield limit of the flange material at 400 KN and 525
KN axial loads at 30 Hz and 60 Hz frequencies respectively. The value of the stress is
observed to be increasing with increase in harmonic axial loading. The maximum axial
stress at the hub-flange fillet has increased from 228 MPa at bolt-up to 262MPa (15%) and
279 MPa (22%) at maximum axial load of 650 KN acting with a harmonic frequency of 30
Hz and 60 Hz respectively. The maximum value of stress intensity at the hub-flange fillet
hhas increased from 269 MPa at bolt-up to 310 MPa (15%) and 322 MPa (20%) at
maximum axial load of 650 KN acting with a harmonic frequency of 30 Hz and 60 Hz
respectively. Increase in the vate of SY and SINT at 650 KN axial load, is respectively
7% and 5% greater with the cyelie frequency of 60 Hz rather than 30 Hz. The increase in
cyclic frequency has some effects on the stresses value at the hub flange fillet location
while the increase in magnitude of the axial load is causing significant increase in the
stresses
BUP + ALON)
ate as as
Fig, 3: Stwesses (SY and SINT) results at the hub flange fillet under BUP
and harmonic axial loading (100~650 KN) of frequency: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz,
4.2.2 Internal Pressure plus Harmonie Avial Loading
Figure 4 shows stress results at the hub flange fillet location under combined design
pressure and harmonic axial loading. Axial stress has crossed the yield limit of the flange
141ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
material at 400 KN at both the frequencies. The value of the stress is observed to be
increasing with the application of design pressure and with the increase in harmonic axial
loading and frequencies. The maximum axial stress at hub-flange fillet has increased from
228 MPa at bolt-up to 272 MPa (19.2%) and 273 MPa (19.726) at maximum axial load of
650 KN acting with harmonic frequency of 30 Hz and 60 Hz respectively. The maximum
value of the stress intensity at the hub-flange fillet has increased from 269 MPa at bolt-up
to 317 MPa (18%) and 319 MPa (18.5%) at maximum axial load of 650 KN acting with
harmonic frequency of 30 Hz and 60 Hz respectively. The increase in the value of SY and
SINT at 650 kN axial load is 0.5% greater with the cyclic frequency of 60 Hz rather than
30 Hz. The increase in the cyclic frequency has negligible effect on the results in this case
because the static internal pressure provides damping to the structure, whereas the increase
in magnitude of the axial load significantly caused an increase in the stresses
SINT
P
+ DP+ ALG)
San aSEr CaS ae
Fig. 4: Stresses (SY and SINT) results atthe hub flange fillet under BUP, DP and
‘harmonic axial loading (100-650 kN) of frequency: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
sy SINT
BUP+BLAS)
ae
Fig, 5: Stresses (SY and SINT) results at the hub flange fillet under BUP and harmonic
bending loading (10-25 kNm) of frequency: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
4.2.3 Harmonic Bending Loading only
Figure 5 shows the stress results at the hub flange fillet location under harmonic
bending loading. With the application of harmonic bending loading, some layers at the hub
flange fillet location came under compression and others in tension, Values of stress at this
location are already very high at bolt-up, so even after compression, no value of stress is
12ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
negative. At 25 kNin bending load, the axial stress at the top node of the hub-flange fillet
has decreased from 228 MPa at bolt-up to 219 MPa and at the bottom node of the hub-
flange fillet, axial stress has increased from 221 MPa at bolt-up to 229 MPa. Variation in
the values of the resulting stresses due to change in the frequencies of the applied bending
loads is negligibly small. Stress intensity at the top node of the hub-flange fillet decreased
from 270 MPa at bolt-up to 259 MPa and at bottom node of hub-flange fillet, the principal
stress increased from 260 MPa at bolt-up to 271 MPa. Stress intensity at all nodes of the
ub flange fillet is above the yield limit of the flange material. Summarizing, an increase
in the magnitude of bending load has a small effect on the resulting stresses while increase
in the cyclic frequencies of these loads has no prominent effect in this case
4.24 Internal Pressure plus Bending Loading
Figure 6 shows the stress results at the hub flange fillet location under design pressure
plus harmonic bending loading. Initially, with the application of internal pressure, the hub
flange fillet came under tension but after the harmonic bending loading some of the layers
at the hub flange fillet location came under compression. At 2SkNm bending load, the
axial stress has increased from 221MPa at bolt-up to 233MPa. Variation in the values of
the resulting stresses due to change in the frequencies of the applied bending loads is
negligibly small. Stress intensity at hub-flange fillet has increased from 260MPa at bolt-up
to 283MPa, Stress intensity at all nodes of hub flange fillet is above yield Limit of the
flange material. Summarizing, an increase in the magnitude of harmonic bending load
after internal pressure has a small effect on the resulting stresses while increase in the
cyclic frequencies of these loads has no prominent effect in this case
wo { a NT
UP +DP+ BLAM)
Sat SEF SEF BF
Fig, 6: Stresses (SY and SINT) results at the hub flange fillet under BUP, DP and
harmonic bending loading (10-25 kNm) of frequency: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hiz
4.2.5 Internal Pressure plus Combined Harmonic Axial Loading plus Harmonie Bending
Loading
Figure 7 shows the stress results at the hub flange fillet location under combined
internal pressure plus harmonic axial (525 KN) plus harmonic bending loading (10~20
KNm). Axial stress has crossed the yield limit of the flange material at DP ~ 525 KN
external load. The value of the stress further increased with the application of internal
pressure and harmonic axial loading. Further application of the combined internal pressure
with harmonic axial and bending loadings has a very small effect on the resulting stress
values. The maximum axial stress at the hub-flange fillet as increased from 263 MPa and
265 MPa at DP+525 KN to 267 MPa (1%) and 268 MPa (1%) at the maximum external
18ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
load of DP + 525 kN + 20 kNm acting with a harmonic frequency of 30 Hz and 60 Hz
respectively. The maximum value of the stress intensity at hub-flange fillet has increased
from 311 MPa and 312 MPa at bolt-up to 312 MPa and 313 MPa at maximum external
load of DP + 525 KN + 20 kNm acting with a harmonic frequency of 30 Hz and 60 Hz
respectively. Under combined external loadings. an increase in the values of the resulting
stress is hardly 1% of those of DP ~ 525 kN. The increase in eyclic frequency has almost
no effects on the stress values under all combined loadings
sy SINT
s2si20
pases
ppvsase
s2si20
pases
ppvsase
ppvsas+20
ppasas
sess
pprsas+20
BUP + DP ALG) + BLONm)
SETA ——ASHF ——HSHF_—-—HB.EF
Fig. 7: Stresses (SY and SINT) results at the hub flange fillet under BUP, DP, harmonic
axial loading (100~650 kN) and harmonic bending loading (10~25 kNm) of frequency: (a)
30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
4.3 Bolt Stress Variation
4.3.1 Harmonic Axial Loading only
Figure 8 shows the average axial stress results at the mid node gauge of each bolt
under BUP and axial loads (100-650 KN) acting harmonically with two different
frequencies 30 Hz and 60 Hz. The values of axial stress in bolts inctease linearly with the
increase in magnitude of axial load and cyclic frequency of the loads. However all
resulting stresses are under the yield limit of the bolt material. At an axial load of 650 kN
acting harmonically with frequency 30 Hz and 60 Hz, the average increase in axial stress
at each bolt of the joint is almost 45% and 65% more than the BUP respectively.
4.3.2 Internal Pressure plus Harmonie Avial Loading
Figure 9 shows the average axial stress results at the mid node gauge of each bolt
under BUP, DP and axial loads (100-650 KN) acting harmonically with two different
frequencies of 30 Hz and 60 Hz. At an axial load of 650 KN acting harmonically with
frequencies of 30 Hz and 60 Hz, the average increase in axial stress at each bolt of the
joint is almost 59% and 60% more than the BUP respectively.
4.3.3 Harmonic Bending Loading only
Figure 10 shows the average axial stress results at the mid node gauge of each bolt
under BUP and bending loads (10-25 KNm) acting harmonically with two different
frequencies 30 Hz and 60 Hz. Overall four bolts (Bolt 1, 2, 3 and 8) came under tension
while remaining four bolts (Bolt 4, 5, 6 and 7) came under compression. The vahte of axial
4ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
stress in the bolts either increased or decreased linearly with the increase in magnitude of
the harmonic bending load. At bending load of 25 kNm acting harmonically with any
frequency, the variation in axial stress at bolts is 0 to 5% of BUP values.
a
ep
—
a
ss
Stross Mt?)
Fig. 8: Average bolt stress variation under bolt-up and harmonic axial loading
(100-650 KN) at frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
20
I
em
Bs
8!
Bs
—35
Br
—ss
00
225
& 3 88
Fig. 9: Bolt average stress variation under BUP, DI
(100~650 kN) at frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
a
a
ss
—
—
— 36
——27
—ss
Stren MPs)
Fig, 10: Bolt average stress variation under bolt-up and harmonic bending loading
(10-25 kNm) at frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
4.3.4 Internal Pressure plus Harmonic Bending Loading
Figure 11 shows the average axial stress results at mid node gauge of each bolt under
BUP, intemal pressure and bending loads (10-25 kNm) acting harmonically with two
rsITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
different frequencies of 30 Hz and 60 Hz. After the application of internal pressure all
bolts came in tension but the after the application of harmonic bending loading, overall
four bolts (Bolt 1, 2, 3 and 8) come under tension while remaining four bolts (Bolt 4, 5, 6
and 7) come under compression, At a bending load of 25 kNm acting harmonically with
any frequency, the variation in axial stress at the bolts is almost 1 to 12% of that of BUP
values.
—a
—=p
Bs
a
—
Fig. 11: Bolt average stress variation under BUP, DP and harmonic bending loading
(10-25 kNm) of frequency: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
4.3.5 Internal Pressure plus Combined Harmonic Axial Loading plus Harmonic Bending
Loading
Figure 12 shows the average axial stress results at the mid node gauge of each bolt
under internal pressure plus combined harmonic axial (525 KN) loading plus harmonic
bending loading (10~20 kNm). Initially, values of axial stress in bolts increase linearly
with the increase in magnitude of axial load and cyclic frequency of the loads. But afier
applying bending loads in combination to the harmonic axial loads, the increase in axial
stress has become calmer. At combined loads of DP ~ 525 KN + 20 kNm acting
harmonically with any frequency: the average increase in axial stress at any bolt of the
KN,
joint is up to 2% of DP +
420
sr
370 5
Bs
at
BS
—25
eB
Bs
Pe.
prs.
BUP.
bP.
pes.
pes.
Fig. 12: Bolt average stress variation under BUP, DP, harmonic axial loading (100-650
ANN) and harmonic bending loading (10~25 kNm) at frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
6ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
44 Gasket Stress Variation
‘Nodes on the gasket (outer and inner) sealing ring corresponding to the bolt location
are selected to study the contact stress variation with the tightening of each bolt and
observe the effect of bolt scatter on the sealing performance.
4.4.1 Harmonic Axial Loading only
Figures 13 and 14 show gasket stress variation at inside and outside sealing ring
diameter respectively, under BUP and axial loading (100-650 KN) acting harmonically at
two different frequencies of 30 Hz and 60 Hz. At both the locations, under BUP and
almost all axial loads and frequencies, the minimum gasket stress is observed at G6
(location of gasket near bolt number 6), An interesting behavior is seen in the gasket
under harmonic axial loads. Initially, with the increase in axial harmonic loads, the
compressive stress in the gasket decreased, but after increasing the load beyond 300 kN
with 30 Hz and 200 KN with 60 Hz the compressive stresses in gasket started to increase.
This is because the yielding started at the hub flange fillet location at 200 KN load, and
then the reverse loadings produced residual stresses in the gasket. It crushed the gasket,
which was more dangerous for the sealing capability of the joint. The minimum
compressive stress in the gasket at the inner sealing ring and outer sealing ring was -94
MPa and -117 MPa respectively. The seating stress recommended by the supplier was -68
MPa [17], which apparently shows the joint was safe against leakage, but actually the
gasket might have been crushed and too weak to oppose leakage. Due to the increase in
the cyclic frequency, the stress variation was about 0 to 15 MPa from bolt-up.
SOEIS__ ap
-_P
+ 100K
200K
eid
100 10x
Stress (MPa
Stress (MPa)
“110
120 a0
azo | 160
Fig, 13: Gasket contact stress variation at Fig, 14: Gasket contact stress variation at
inner sealing ring under bolt-up and harmonic outer sealing ring under bolt-up and
axial loading (100650 KN) at a frequency of: harmonic axial loading (100~650 kN) at
(a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz. a frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
4.4.2 Internal Pressure plus Harmonic Axial Loading
Figures 15 and 16 show gasket stress variation at the inside and outside sealing ring
diameter respectively, at BUP, DP and axial loading (100-650 KN) acting harmonically at
two different frequencies of 30 Hz and 60 Hz. At both locations, the minimum gasket
stress was observed at G6 (location of gasket near bolt number 6). With the increase in
axial harmonic loads the compressive stress in the gasket was decreasing but at some loads
(e.g. 300 KN and 400 kN with 30 Hz and 60 Hz frequencies respectively) the compressive
stress was increasing at some gasket locations because the residual stresses induced
reverse loading. It may have cruslied the gasket, which was more dangerous for the sealingITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
capability of the joint. The minimum compressive stress in the gasket at the inner sealing
ring and outer sealing ring was -92 MPa and -122 MPa respectively. Variation of stress by
varying cyelic frequency was between 0 MPa to 12 MPa
“ uP
‘ —vP
. 100K
36 200K
= 0 300K
3-100 00K
2 ano a s25KN
oo sox
130 -160
Fig. 15: Gasket contact stress variation at Fig. 16: Gasket contact stress variation at
inner sealing ring under bolt-up and harmonic outer sealing ring under bolt-up and
axial loading (100~650 KN) ata frequency of: harmonic axial loading (100~650 KN) at a
(a) 30 He, (b) 60 Hz, frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz,
4.4.3 Harmonic Bending Loading only
Figures 17 and 18 show gasket stress variation at the inside and outside sealing ring
diameter respectively, at BUP and bending loading (10~25 kNm) acting harmonically at
‘two different frequencies of 30 Hz and 60 Hz. At the inner sealing ring diameter. the
minimum gasket stress was observed at G2 and Gé6 (gasket locations near bolts mumber 2
& 6). At the outer sealing ring, the minimum gasket stress was observed at G6 and G8
(gasket locations near bolts number 6 & 8). Variation of gasket contact stress was small
with increase in bending loads and their frequencies. The minimum compressive stress in
the gasket at the inner and outer sealing rings was -105 MPa and -133 MPa respectively.
Hence the joint was almost safe against leakage.
seeesssé
eB
10K
ke
20m
25
BP
a 10K
Ae KN
e 20K
2K
Stress (MPa)
Fig. 17: Gasket contact stress variation at Fig. 18: Gasket contact stress variation at
inner sealing ring under BUP and harmonic outer sealing ring under BUP and harmonic
bending loading (10~25 kNm) at a bending loading (10-25 kNm) at a
frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz. frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
1sITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
444 Internal Pressure plus Harmonic Bending Loading
Figures 19 and 20 show gasket stress variation at the inside and outside sealing ring
diameters respectively, at BUP, DP and harmonic bending loading (10-25 KNm) with
frequencies 30-60 Hz. At the inner sealing ring diameter, the minimum gasket stress was
observed at G6 (gasket location near bolt mumber 6). At the outer sealing ring, the
minimum gasket stress was observed at G8 (gasket location near bolt number 8). In
contrast to the results of previous case (only harmonic bending loading), the gasket stress
values in this case were sufficiently below BUP and the main reason for this was the
application of internal pressure. Variation of the gasket stress under different harmonic
bending loads was again very small. The minimum compressive stress in the gasket at the
inner and outer sealing rings was -102 MPa and -130 MPa respectively. Hence the joint
was almost safe against leakage.
BS BUSTSEES
4p CSSBBSEE — BISTSSES
BP “207
ea
=D “25
10m
em
a 20KNm
KN
oP
10K
eee
130
20K
Stress(MPa)
z 2m
as
ous «aso |
Fig. 19: Gasket contact stress variation at
inner sealing ring under BUP, DP and
harmonic bending loading (10~25 kNm) at
1 frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
Fig. 20: Gasket contact stress variation at
outer sealing ring under BUP, DP and
harmonic bending loading (10~25 kNm) at a
frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz
130 aoe
SS ___ aw
bP 130
pesky 13s
DP 0N
os 140
KN-2OKNm
stress (MPa)
Stee (MPay
os
130
Fig. 21: Gasket contact stress variation at
inner sealing ring under BUP, DP,
harmonic axial loading (100~650 KN) and
harmonic bending loading (10~25 kNm) at
a frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
Fig. 22: Gasket contact stress variation at
outer sealing ring under BUP, DP, harmonic
axial loading (100-650 kN) and harmonic
bending loading (10-25 kNm) at a
frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz
44.5 Internal Pressure plus Combined Harmonic Axial Loading plus Harmonic Bending
Loading
Figures 21 and 22 show the gasket stress variation at the inside and outside sealing
ring diameter respectively, at BUP, DP and combined harmonic axial (5:
5 KN) and
149ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
bending loading (10~20 kNm) acting at two different frequencies of 30Hz and 60Hz. At
the inside sealing ring diameter, under all loadings and frequencies, the minimum gasket
stress was observed at G6 (gasket location near bolt number 6), while at the outside
diameter, the minimum stress was observed at G8 (gasket location near bolt number 8).
More contact stress was found under higher combined loads. The reason for this was that
the plasticity started at the flange. This stress was dangerous for the gasket and crushed it.
The minimum compressive siress in the gasket at the inside and outside sealing ring
diameter was -102 MPa and -131 MPa respectively. Outwardly, it looked safe for the seal
con the basis of seat stress, but actually, the gasket was crushed, increasing the chances of
leakage. The variation of the stress by varying cyclic frequency was very small.
45 Displacement versus Time at Flange
The graph is plotted for a time of 5 seconds when the joint was under external
vibration loads only. The plots are typical sinusoidal curves showing the vibration
behavior of the flange. Higher axial loads and higher cyelic frequencies have resulted in
maximum amplitudes.
4.5.1 Harmonic Axial Loading only
Figure 23 shows the displacement history of the lange innermost location during
vibrating axial loads (100~650 kN) with two different eyclic frequencies (30~60Hz). The
flange joint was under contimious tension and compression loads, but the tension was
dominant. The amplitude of the curve was changing in every other cycle and the reason
‘was that the plasticity started at the flange. Maximum amplitude in case of 30 Hz cyclic
frequency was -0.25516 mm (at time step 4.5) and. in case of 60 Hz cyclic frequency was
-0.24764 mm (at time step 2.5), which was initially -0.4 mm at BUP. The behavior of the
flange displacement under harmonic loads was the fatigue phenomenon which may cause
failure at any time step later on. Generally, the maximum values found under harmonic
axial loads had little difference to those found under equivalent static loads but the actual
problem was the fluctuation of stresses and displacements with time under harmonic loads
‘which is called fatigue and therein lies the real challenge
°
time (ee)
—100KN e200 300K e400 Os
50K
Fig. 23: Flange raised face displacement versus time under harmonic axial loading
(100-650 KN) at a frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
150ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
45.2 Internal Pressure plus Harmonic Axial Loading
Figure 24 shows the displacement history of the flange innermost location at DP and
during the vibrating axial loads (100~650 KN) with two different cyclic frequencies
(30-60 Hz). Higher axial loads and higher cyclic frequencies resulted in maximum
amplitudes. Maximum amplitude in the case of 30 Hz cyclic frequency was -0.26494 mm
{at time step of 3.5 seconds) and in case of 60 Hz cyclic frequency it was -0.26274 mm (at
time step of 1.5 seconds), which was initially -0.4 mm at BUP plus DP. Again, tension
‘was dominant over compression and the maximum amplitude was in the form of tension.
Plasticity produced in the flange was the reason for the difference in the amplitude of
different cycles.
time ee)
eH 100KN —e 200K S00K 400K
650K
Fig. 24: Flange raised face displacement versus time under DP and harmonic axial loading
(100~650 KN) at a frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz.
4.5.3 Harmonic Bending Loading only
Figure 25 shows the displacement history of the flange innermost location during the
vibrating bending loads (10-25 kNm) with two different cyclic frequencies (30-60 Hz)
Maximum amplitude under both frequencies was almost same but the trend during the
time of vibration was different, which showed the effect of frequency change during the
fatigue period. The overall amplitude of the displacement was too low in this case in
comparison to the previous two cases of axial loading. The maximum amplitude in case of
30 Hz cyclic frequency was -0.39978 mm (at time step of 4.5 sec) and in case of 60 Hz
cyclic frequency was -0,39913 mm (at time step of 0.4 sec), which was initially -0.403
mm at BUP. The behavior of the flange displacement under harmonic loads was the
fatigue phenomenon, which may cause failure of at any time step later on.
4.5.4 Internal Pressure plus Harmonic Bending Loading only
Figure 26 shows the displacement history of the flange innermost location at DP
during the vibrating bending loads (10-25 kNm) with two different cyclic frequencies
(30-60 Hz). Maximum amplitude under both frequencies was almost same but the trend
uring the time of vibration was different, which showed the effect of frequency change
Guring the fatigue period. The overall amplitude of displacement was too low in this caseITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
time ee)
tom etki 20m 25k
Fig, 25: Flange raised face displacement versus time under harmonic bending loading
(10-25 kNm) at a frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz
oats
082
time ee)
Hoe ie 20 see
Fig. 26: Flange raised face displacement versus time under DP and harmonic bending
loading (100-650 kN) ata frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 He.
in comparison to the axial loading cases. Maximum amplitude in the case of 30 Hz cyelic
frequency was -0.38558 mm (at time step of 1.5 sec) and in case of 60 Hz eyelie frequency
was -0.38586 mm (at time step of 2.5 sec) which was initially -0.389mm afier the
application of internal pressure. The behavior of the flange displacement under harmonic
loads was the fatigue phenomenon, which may cause failure of at any time step later on.
4.5.5 Internal Pressure plus Combined Harmonic Axial Loading plus Harmonie Bending
Loading
Figure 27 shows the displacement history of the flange innermost location under DP
and combined DP and harmonic axial (525 kN) and bending loadings (10~20 kNm) with
two different cyclic frequencies (30~60 Hz). Combined DP plus harmonic axial and
bending loadings had almost the same resulting displacement values as those of DP plus
152ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
harmonic axial loading. It showed that the combined internal pressure plus harmonic axial
and bending loadings have no more effect than the combined DP plus axial loading.
Maximum amplitude in the case of 30 Hz cyclic frequency was -0.29132 mm (at time step
3.5 sec) and in case of 60 Hz cyclic frequency was -0.28736 mm (at time step 1.5 sec)
which was initially -0.38 mm at DP. The behavior of the flange displacement under
harmonic loads was the fatigue phenomenon which may cause failure at any time step
later on,
n
tle Ge)
s25KN“10LN 4 DP+S251N+20EN
Fig. 27: Flange raised face displacement versus time under harmonic axial loading
(100~650 KN) at a frequency of: (a) 30 Hz, (b) 60 Hz,
CONCLUSION
In harmonic analysis, axial loadings are concluded to be more critical over bending
loadings in addition to internal pressure. At the hub flange fillet location, stress
values have exceeded the yield limit (250 MPa) of flange material, which is a risk
to the mechanical strength of the joint. Reverse loadings after the yield limit are
producing residual stress in the gasket, which crushes the gasket and increases the
chances of leakage.
In the case of harmonic axial loads plus internal pressure, the stress values increase
about 19% at the hub flange fillet location, and 60% at the bolts, which is a sign of
risk to the joint strength,
Combinations of harmonic loads and internal pressure produce lesser stresses and
displacements in comparison to single harmonic loads. This is because combined
loads damp out each other's effects.
Higher amplitudes of harmonic loads and higher frequencies result in more stresses
and displacements, hence a greater risk to the joint strength and sealing capability.
On the other hand, lower frequencies cause a greater number of fatigue cycles in
the same vibration time interval, which is also a risk for sealing,
In all cases, the gasket stresses were above the recommended seating stress of -68
MPa, which showed that the gasket was crushed and this would affect the sealing
capability of the joint.
18ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016 Abid etal
«# In the case of harmonic axial loads plus internal pressure, an average maximum
displacement of -0.26 mm was produced at the flange raised face, which was
initially -0.4 mm at BUP plus internal pressure. This change in displacement
showed flange rotation, which is responsible for producing a gap between the two
flanges at the contact faces. Hence, there was a chance of leakage.
REFERENCES
[1] Gaul L, Lenz J. (1997) Nonlinear dynamics of structures assembled by bolted joints. Acta
Mechanica, 125(1—4):169-181
[2] Ibrahim RA, Pettit CL. (2005) Uncertainties and dynamic problems of bolted joints and
other fasteners. J. Sound and Vibration, 279:857-936.
(3] alli H, Ahmadian H, Mottershead JE. (2007) Identification of nonlinear bolted lap-joint
parameters by force-state mapping. Int J. Solids and Structures, 44:8087-8105,
[4] Khan NB. (2009) Stamina of Gasketed Pipe Flange Joint under Combined Loading: 3D FEA
Study. MS thesis, GIK Institute of Engineering Sciences and Technology. Topi, Pakistan
[5] Lina T, Lia R, Long H, Ou H. (2006) Three-dimensional transient sealing analysis of the
bolted flange connections of reactor pressure vessel. Nuc. Eng. Design, 236(24):2599-2607.
[6] Luan Y, Guan Z, Cheng G. (2010) The study on nonlinear dynamic behaviors of the
structures with bolted-flange joint. IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 1-
12.
[7] Miller HL. 2001) Piping Vibration Involving Control Valves. Int. Joint Generation
Conference and Exposition ASME International - Power Division, 1-11,
[8] Ouyang H. Oldfield MJ, Mottershead JE. (2006) Experimental and theoretical studies of a
bolted joint excited by a torsional dynamic load. Int. J. Mechanical Sciences, 48:1447- 1435,
[9] Semkea WH, Bibel GD, Jerath S, Guravb SB, Webster AL. (2006) Efficient dynamic
structural response modelling of bolted flange piping systems. Int. J. Pressure Vessels and
Piping, 83:767-776.
[10] Tanlak N, Sonmez F. Talay E. (2010) Detailed and simplified models of bolted joints under
impact loading. The J. Strain Analysis for Engineering Design, 46(3):213-225,
[11] Abid M. (2000) Experimental and analytical studies of conventional (gasketed) and
luncoventional (non gasketed) flanged pipe joints (with special emphasis on the engineering
of joint strenght’ and ‘sealing’. PAD Thesis, University of strathelyde, Glasgow, UK.
[12] Wilcoxon Research. Pump monitoring with Wilcoxon piezoelectric accelerometers.
bntp:/www.wileoxon com. 2009.
[13] ANSYS Ine. (2011), ANSYS elements manual, 13th edition, ANSYS Ine.
[14] American Society of Mechanical Engineering (1998) ASME boiler and pressure vessel Code
Section VII, Part D. New York, USA.
[15] Nagata S, Shoji Y, Toshiyuki S, (2002) A simplified modeling of gasket stress-strain curve
for fem analysis in bolted flange joint design ASME Intemational PVP Conference, BC
Canada, 53-58,
[16] Abid M, Hussain S. (2007) Bolt preload scatter and relaxation behavior during tightening a 4
in-900# flange joint with spiral wound gasket. Proc. IMech, 222(part E), J. Process
Mechanical Engineering, 123-134.
[17] ASME PCC-1-2000. (2002) Guidelines for pressure boundary bolted flange joint assembly.
‘An American National Standard,
NOMENCLATURE
HF Hob flange
HB Hub bottom
HS Hub side
134ITUM Engineering Journal, Vol. 17.No. 2, 2016
ar
BUP
sy
SINT
DP
AL
BL
FRO
Hub top
Bolt up
Bending stress
‘Stress intensity
Design pressure
Axial loading
Bending loading
Frequency
Abid etal